home

Senate Issues Apology for Failing to Enact Lynching Law

By Jeralyn, Section Social Justice
Posted on Tue Jun 14, 2005 at 05:32:03 AM EST
Tags: (all tags)
Share This: Digg! StumbleUpon del.icio.us reddit reddit

The Senate today issued a long overdue apology for refusing to heed the requests of seven Presidents to enact a law making lynching a crime.

The apology was enacted on a voice vote which was not recorded. This article says that while there were 80 co-sponsors of the bill, only six Senators showed up for the voice vote.

With many members straggling back to town from a weekend at home, and only six coming to the floor to vote, the Senate delivered a historic apology Monday night for failing to move against a wave of lynchings that claimed more than 4,700 Americans – most of them black – from the 1880s until the 1960s.

Who was against it? America Blog has the updated list.

If you've never seen a photo of a lynching, go here.

< Schapelle Corby: Message From Family | Tuesday Open Thread >

  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft


    • Display: Sort:
    Senate Issues Apology for Failing to Enact Lynching Law | 35 comments (35 topical)
    Re: Senate Issues Apology for Failing to Enact Lyn (none / 0) (#1)
    by DawesFred60 on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:00:01 PM EST
    7 presidents ask congress to enact laws that would stop Lynching and it did 100 years after the fact, so ask congress about why it enacted the patriot act? its just a form of Lynching all people for about anything in the end.

    Re: Senate Issues Apology for Failing to Enact Lyn (none / 0) (#2)
    by ras on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:00:01 PM EST
    Just curious, but have the Dems ever apologized for filibustering against civil rights laws, for, like, oh-so-many generations? I presume they're sorry, right?

    Re: Senate Issues Apology for Failing to Enact Lyn (none / 0) (#4)
    by Johnny on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:00:01 PM EST
    ras hits the nail right on the head... who cares that neither worngwingers or left winger ever thought to make hangin somebody because you don't like them a crime... ras is such a typical repug... No such thing as looking forward, only looking back at a utopia that neverm ever existed. And any conservative that says he is looking to the future for a better solution, by definition, is not a conservative. Go ras, go.

    Re: Senate Issues Apology for Failing to Enact Lyn (none / 0) (#5)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:00:01 PM EST
    From dailykos... Non-signers: Bingaman (D-NM) Conrad (D-ND) Reed (D-RI) Alexander (R-TN) Bennett (R-UT) Cochran (R-MS) Cornyn (R-TX) Crapo (R-ID) Enzi (R-WY) Grassley (R-IA) Hatch (R-UT) Hutchison (R-TX) Kyl (R-AZ) Lott (R-MS) Murkowski (R-AK) Shelby (R-AL) Smith (R-OR) Sununu (R-NH) Thomas (R-WY) Voinovich (R-OH)

    Re: Senate Issues Apology for Failing to Enact Lyn (none / 0) (#6)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:00:01 PM EST
    You would have to wonder if a Federal ban would even be constitutional. The SCOTUS is increasingly restricting the power of the Commerce Clause (US v. Lopez; US v. Morrison). I also suspect that it wouldn't pass muster under the Enforcement Clause of the 14th Amendment, since that doesn't apply to actions of private citizens (no matter how egregious).

    Re: Senate Issues Apology for Failing to Enact Lyn (none / 0) (#7)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:00:01 PM EST
    wp says: the better question is why now? Anti-terrorism, n'est pas?

    Re: Senate Issues Apology for Failing to Enact Lyn (none / 0) (#8)
    by kdog on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:00:01 PM EST
    I wasn't aware there were presidents and legislators speaking out against lynching way back when. That is somewhat heartening, as it shows me that not everyone in power was so savage, turning a blind eye to the practice. Then I am again disheartened there were not enough civilized legislators, or citizens for that matter. Human beings at their worst are the vilest creatures on earth.

    Re: Senate Issues Apology for Failing to Enact Lyn (none / 0) (#9)
    by ppjakajim on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:00:01 PM EST
    ras - Even though it has no material effect, it is right that the Senate does this. We should understand that anti-lynching laws, as detailed here, were fought against time and again by a minority. And the principle weapon used was the fillibuster.

    Re: Senate Issues Apology for Failing to Enact Lyn (none / 0) (#10)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:00:01 PM EST
    ras, I wonder why you didn't bring up the fact that it was mostly Sen.'s from the south of both political persuasions that filibustered all other anti-lynching legislation. Selective memory, a common failing of most Americans, no doubt had something to do with your omission of any wrongdoing of Republicans in the past. I also love how your own self-righteousness comes through in your comments. As if nobody else knows about the sordid history of the Democrats until you bring it up. I am what is considered a "minority" in this country and I am very familiar with the racist past of the Democrats and I am committed to changing this party to be in complete opposition to all the horrible things it once stood for. Being from a southern state I can also tell you with all honesty that the Republican party has gladly taken up where the Dixiecrats left off. Just look at the political affiliation and the geographical location of the Sen.s that didn't sign on as co-sponsors.

    Re: Senate Issues Apology for Failing to Enact Lyn (none / 0) (#11)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:00:01 PM EST
    I've been told this is the list: Lamar Alexander (R-TN) Robert Bennett (R-UT) Thad Cochran (R-MS) Kent Conrad (D-ND) John Cornyn (R-TX) Michael Crapo (R-ID) Michael Enzi (R-WY) Chuck Grassley (R-ID) Judd Gregg (R-NH) Orrin Hatch (R-UT) Trent Lott (R-MS) Lisa Murkowski (R-AK) Richard Shelby (R-AL) John Sununu (R-NH) Craig Thomas (R-WY) George Voinovich (R-OH)

    Re: Senate Issues Apology for Failing to Enact Lyn (none / 0) (#12)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:00:01 PM EST
    And this all comes at the same time as a wave of investigations & prosecutions for the most egregious civil rights cases of the 60's (Emmett Till, Birmingham church bombings, Medgar Evers, Schwerner/Chaney/Goodman, etc.). I'm not exactly displeased with the result, but the timing seems both... well, odd & extremely late. Gives me hope that Kissinger will face some prison time before all is said and done, tho'.

    Re: Senate Issues Apology for Failing to Enact Lyn (none / 0) (#13)
    by roy on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:00:01 PM EST
    Wasn't lynching already illegal, since it was a particular kind of murder?

    Re: Senate Issues Apology for Failing to Enact Lyn (none / 0) (#14)
    by nolo on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:00:01 PM EST
    roy, murder was illegal under all states' laws, but lynchers were not being prosecuted by state authorities for murder, or for anything else. Making lynching a federal crime would have allowed federal prosecutors to step in. The anti-anti-lynching senators, however, argued that anti-lynching laws weren't necessary because (you guessed it) murder was already illegal under state law, and the feds shouldn't be extending themselves into traditional state police powers.

    Re: Senate Issues Apology for Failing to Enact Lyn (none / 0) (#15)
    by ras on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:00:01 PM EST
    Shermbuck, Selective memory, a common failing of most Americans, no doubt had something to do with your omission of any wrongdoing of Republicans in the past. Exceptin' I ain't an American. But other than getting your fundamental premise wrong, no probs. As for the "selective memory," pls google this site for my previous commentary on that subject: you're two for two.

    Re: Senate Issues Apology for Failing to Enact Lyn (none / 0) (#17)
    by Richard Aubrey on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:00:01 PM EST
    For the resistance to anti-lynching, see SCOTUS, Cruickshank. Wasn't Congress in the way.

    Re: Senate Issues Apology for Failing to Enact Lyn (none / 0) (#18)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:00:01 PM EST
    Interestingly enough, the lynching phenomenon resulted from judicial activism: the Supreme Court declared that blacks were "... a subordinate and inferior class of beings ..." (Dred Scott vs. Sanford). Consequently it became broadly legal to kill blacks, resulting in the tragic genocide that most people now recognize as evil 150 years later. (of course, at the time we all would have been called extremist abolitionists) Here's betting that in less than 150 years they'll be issuing the same apology for not opposing abortion, our modern-day version of murdering non-persons, also put in place by judicial activism. It'd be ironic if the Dems start labelling the Republicans as 'ageist' for not opposing abortion enough, just as they label them 'racist' now despite Abraham Lincoln and the following Republicans who rammed Civil Rights legislation through the Congress while facing fillibusters from Democrat senators.

    Re: Senate Issues Apology for Failing to Enact Lyn (none / 0) (#19)
    by ppjakajim on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:00:01 PM EST
    ShermBuck writes:
    Just look at the political affiliation and the geographical location of the Sen.s that didn't sign on as co-sponsors.
    Sherm, there are 16 names on the list. Ten (10) of the 16 are not from the south. That's 62.5%. And that is co-sponsors, not who voted for. So it your numbers really don't add up. BTW - Did you use the link I provided? It shows when fillibusters were used to harm the rights of black americans. Anti-lynching - 1922, 1935, and 1938 Anti- Poll Tax - 1942, 1944, and 1946 Protecting black voters - 1870 and 1890-91 Anti-race discrimination statutes on 11 occasions between 1946 and 1975 Pro-segregation filibuster of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, which went on for 74 days. And, of course, the father of using the fillibuster, Calhoun's inception of it to defend slavery, in 1841. Sometimes it is necessary to take a long view when condemning various acts. If Calhoun had not bee successful, would there have been a Civil War? Perhaps, in a Democracy, it is best for the majority to rule.

    Re: Senate Issues Apology for Failing to Enact Lyn (none / 0) (#20)
    by Dadler on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:00:01 PM EST
    Grad Student, If there's no difference between a living, breathing, independent human being and a fetus, then the actual living of life is meaningless. Equating a woman terminating a pregnancy with a lynch mob is no different than saying pot and heroin pose the same danger. They are two different things, on carrried out with MALICE, the other carried out with REGRET.

    Re: Senate Issues Apology for Failing to Enact Lyn (none / 0) (#21)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:00:01 PM EST
    Dadler, to say that a fetus the day before birth is less human than a baby the day after birth is absurd. And to acknowledge the life of a baby prior to birth does not make life meaningless any more than acknowledging the life of a newborn. Helplessness does not equal inferiority. Every case of genocide in history has been justified by calling the victims inferior, and then strippping them of rights. You are repeating this very phenomenon. In the case of slavery (and after slavery, lynching) whites decided that blacks were less than other people, and could therefore be enslaved/killed. It was a convenient way to justify victimizing others. This is no longer the case, thanks to Abraham Lincoln and the party he started. Today people recognize that one's humanity is not based on one's race. However, people do still try to victimize others; not for free labor, but for a backup to contraception (consequence-free sex, if you will). They justify this by declaring that before a certain age, children are not persons, and can therefore be torn apart and thrown in the trash (with regret, as you compassionately noted). Same argument, different century and victims.

    Re: Senate Issues Apology for Failing to Enact Lyn (none / 0) (#22)
    by roy on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:00:01 PM EST
    Grad Student, Focusing on how we have people to be non-people in the past is a useful way to say "be careful", but it doesn't address specific situations. You need to show that fetuses are people before you complain about them being declared non-people. Without that, your arguments would apply equally well to anything anybody calls a person. They would apply to non-fertilized eggs and to individual sperm.

    Re: Senate Issues Apology for Failing to Enact Lyn (none / 0) (#23)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:00:01 PM EST
    Let me say, first of all, that I expected a hysterical response to my initial post (that is my past experience with this issue on this site). Instead I have been met with reasoned, dispassionate argument - hat tip to dadler and roy. Now to your argument roy: since the newborn is unmistakably human, and the fetus is exactly the same indivual (organs, dna, knows her mother's voice, etc.) I think the burden of proof lies with those who would make the unborn less than human. In the same way, no one had to prove that blacks are human before slavery could be outlawed; it's obvious (to an unbiased observer), just as the fact that a baby 1 hour prior to birth is the same human as the baby 1 hour after birth. In situ ultrasounds showing the baby in agony as she is torn apart by a set of forceps make it even more obvious. Clearly the baby is a living, entire being (i.e. not a sperm cell, which can never grow up into a human adult). And it's not a living, entire, kangaroo... the unborn child is a child, and is not fully developed in the same way that pre-pubescent children are not fully developed. No, friend, the issue is the same. Whenever people say 'human...but not as human as me' they are using the rhetoric of genocide, whether it be slavery, lynch mobs, nazism, or abortion. Luckily humans are basically decent, so such evil never lasts very long (i.e. not usually more than a century) before it is condemned and stopped. But while it persists, those who would make other humans 'non-persons' always shout about their 'freedom', their 'choice'. Freedom of states to make their own laws, freedom of a nation to 'cleanse' its own population, or freedom of parents to choose whether their children may live. As a side note: here in Canada the Supreme Court openly admitted that the unborn are human beings, but declared them "not persons". It was (eerily) almost exactly the same wording as was used in the 19th century US about aboriginals and blacks.

    Re: Senate Issues Apology for Failing to Enact Lyn (none / 0) (#24)
    by kdog on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:00:01 PM EST
    The basic difference you miss grad student is that blacks, jews, "insert oppressed group here"...none of these persons lived inside the body of another. Until the fetus is born and becomes a child, it's a part of the mother's body. Do we really want to open that pandoras box, allowing govt. in our bodies?

    Re: Senate Issues Apology for Failing to Enact Lyn (none / 0) (#25)
    by aw on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:00:01 PM EST
    grad student: stick to the subject of the posting which is lynching, not late-term abortion.

    Re: Senate Issues Apology for Failing to Enact Lyn (none / 0) (#26)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:00:01 PM EST
    aw's right, however, this is a great discussion. I, for one, am interested in seeing it develop. See if you can continue it over on the Tuesday Open Thread.

    Re: Senate Issues Apology for Failing to Enact Lyn (none / 0) (#27)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:00:01 PM EST
    Posted by Johnny: "hangin somebody because you don't like them a crime..." Lynching is not just racist hanging. Lynching is PUBLIC CELEBRATION of racist hanging. == The KKK-Republican party; bringing the love of racist violence into the 21st century: From the six Southern slave states: * Thad Cochran (R-MS) * Saxby Chambliss (R-GA) * Richard Shelby (R-AL) * Trent Lott (R-MS) From Texas (which joined the C., removing loyal Sam Houston as governor): * John Cornyn (R-TX) Following the Battle of Fort Sumter: * Lamar Alexander (R-TN) From MO or KY, factions in those states accepted as members of the Confederacy. * Christopher Bond (R-MO) Betrayers of their honorable Civil War veterans: * Judd Gregg (R-NH) * John Sununu (R-NH) * Jim Bunning (R-KY) * George Voinovich (R-OH) * Chuck Grassley (R-IA) == From New Confederacies of the West: * Kent Conrad (D-ND) BOO! * Michael Crapo (R-ID) * Conrad Burns (R-MT) * Michael Enzi (R-WY) * Craig Thomas (R-WY) * Orrin Hatch (R-UT) * Robert Bennett (R-UT) * Lisa Murkowski (R-AK) ==

    Re: Senate Issues Apology for Failing to Enact Lyn (none / 0) (#28)
    by desertswine on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:00:01 PM EST
    Canada must be mind-numbingly boring.

    Re: Senate Issues Apology for Failing to Enact Lyn (none / 0) (#29)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:00:02 PM EST
    I have heard many on the right attempt to equate abortion and slavery as equals. I think it demonstrates their total lack of understanding of the eighteenth century. Slavery was not started as a cruel act to kill blacks from Africa. It was a calculated move that brought Europeans loads of money in the New World. The trade was stopped only after it become too costly to utilize slave labor. If you want to argue abortion is wrong, just say that, why do you need to substantiate your info with tidbits of information from your own skewed sense of history.

    Re: Senate Issues Apology for Failing to Enact Lyn (none / 0) (#31)
    by Kitt on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:00:02 PM EST
    I called Senator Crapo's office this morning and asked why. I have two (return) calls from his office on my caller ID - no message left. I did talk to the staffer for a couple of minutes and there may indeed be some logical explanation. Sen. Larry Craig signed on; he's as Republican as Crapo - so don't know. On one of our local democrat lists, someone who recently ran for state senator wondered about the timing as it relates to "the filibuster" and the damage it can have. I don't disagree with him. If that is the reason for the mass signing on, it shouldn't work. Those doing the filibustering at the time (who were democrats, I believe Kos and Atrios pointed out) were doing so as to avoid losing a specific "way of life" especially in 1938/1939 when the filibuster was the longest (something like 6 weeks). The usual keeping them black folks in their place kind of thing.

    Re: Senate Issues Apology for Failing to Enact Lyn (none / 0) (#32)
    by ppjakajim on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:00:02 PM EST
    wg - Perhaps they feel that since they were never involved, they don't owe anyone an apology. I am not sure how much good it does. It certainly doesn't hurt, and the Senate should do this. The other thought I have is, as noted above, co-sponsors are fine, but the bill will be introduced and voted on. Perhaps they will just vote for it. A little patience might be in order. We can hang those who don't support it, later. ;-)

    Re: Senate Issues Apology for Failing to Enact Lyn (none / 0) (#33)
    by Richard Aubrey on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:00:02 PM EST
    Apologizing for the actions of another is a cheeeeep way to look good. It offers the further advantage that a grown-up (you can tell because grown-ups decline to participate in the sham) can be made to look bad by the demagogues. IMO, anybody calling for an apology for something I/we didn't do gets told to get a life. Wouldn't you feel just a bit slimy getting props for apologizing for something you didn't do, knowing the whole set-up was a scam but that a sizable number of people (lefties) are pretending to take it seriously?

    Re: Senate Issues Apology for Failing to Enact Lyn (none / 0) (#34)
    by Aaron on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:00:04 PM EST
    Dear Black people Yeah, we're sorry about that little lynching thing, we didn't really mean it. Sincerely The white devils -------------------------------------- Here in Florida we have a long beautiful history of lynching people some occurring as recently as the 1970s. -------------------------------------- Dear Congress You can keep your apology, just leave the Voting Rights Act and the Civil Rights Act and affirmative action alone, and we'll call it even. Sounds like a bargain to me. Sincerely Me

    Re: Senate Issues Apology for Failing to Enact Lyn (none / 0) (#35)
    by Wile ECoyote on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:00:04 PM EST
    Holy Grand Kleagles Batman: Something Sen. Byrd actually knows about and he didn't wax eloquent at all.

    Re: Senate Issues Apology for Failing to Enact Lyn (none / 0) (#36)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:00:05 PM EST
    "Could not be that they think lynching was OK. Could it? Or that they are racists." Ding, ding, ding. You ought to look up the Concerned Citizens Council, widely recognized as the public wing of the KKK (CCC, get it?). If you think these people aren't racists (or aren't pandering to the racists in their states), you have a hilariously inaccurate view of the world.

    Re: Senate Issues Apology for Failing to Enact Lyn (none / 0) (#37)
    by Sailor on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:00:05 PM EST
    They 'voted' on it late at night. The Senate leader, frist, refused to allow it to be put to a voice vote (i.e. recorded vote, see Senate rules.) Almost no one was present, but by senate rules, just like schiavo, it passed. These 14 republicans mentioed above to sign on as co-sponsors, which can be done, and often is, after a 'unanimous' vote. RA, they weren't apologizing for themselves, they were apologizing for the institution of the Senate. Nice try tho. Aaron, I'm with you. What do you suppose the current economic value of "40 acres and a mule" is? Not to mention the interest on wrongful death benefits from a lynching.

    Re: Senate Issues Apology for Failing to Enact Lyn (none / 0) (#38)
    by Sailor on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:00:05 PM EST
    correction:"These 14 republicans mentioed above REFUSED to sign on as co-sponsors, which can be done, and often is, after a 'unanimous' vote."

    Senate Issues Apology for Failing to Enact Lynching Law | 35 comments (35 topical)